Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Nikon D700  (Read 1653 times)

Lochen

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
Nikon D700
« on: August 04, 2016, 11:52:38 AM »

Hi everyone.
It's been a good few years since I was involved in any photography, or owned any photographic equipment. Way back in 2008 I owned an Olympus four thirds digital camera. Prior to that I shot film with a brace of OM 2's and a Hasselblad 6x6.

I had a few hundred images on a couple of agency sites and sold a very, very few.......but I was in it mainly as a hobby and if I'm honest, never did develop a sufficiently robust output or workflow, I just enjoyed photography as a neat pastime.

And now that I'm semi retired, I find myself looking at equipment again and where I've reached a bit of an impass.

Both my income level and available budget are quite limited, I'm looking for the best I can get for the least money. Now back in '08, I desperately wanted a Nikon D700......I guess you'll all know why......

My question is.....would the D700 be a valid proposition in 2016?

I can get a good, low shutter count D700 really quite cheaply which will allow me to stump up for say, a 24-300 nikkor, all day, all subject lens as a starter.

I kinda remember being all done with the small sensors (Olympus) as they created so much post work per image just to get through the picture agency QC.

Any advice would be hugely appreciated. I'm a bit lost at the moment.

Thank you all
Barry
Logged

scyth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 532
Re: Nikon D700
« Reply #1 on: August 04, 2016, 12:35:17 PM »

why 'd you need to haul D700 & turisto-zoom ? just get a small /Olympus !/ m43 and one fix and enjoy it light and in the light
Logged

GrahamBy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1393
    • 500px
Re: Nikon D700
« Reply #3 on: August 04, 2016, 07:50:59 PM »

Small sensors have moved on a long way...
Logged

langier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 848
    • Celebrating Rural America and beyond
Re: Nikon D700
« Reply #4 on: August 04, 2016, 09:45:44 PM »

Though I still use my D700 and the IQ is still quite good, I really like packing my Panasonic and Olympus m43 and their very small and light lenses. The D700 and the 28-300mm is a nice combo, but in a few short hours, it's as heavy and convenient as a ball and chain. The m43 and 14-140 or 14-150 does the same in a smaller package, nearly as good or equal image quality as the D700 and liberating when you pack and shoot it all day.

In my recent travels, it has been nice to be ignored because my camera is small and quiet. When I shot with my D700, I stood out like a sore thumb.

The only real issue is not the image quality, but the number of photos per battery, about 15-20% of my D700 but with a few small batteries in my pocket, it's just a matter of changing them out. Since I now do some filming, that's another bonus with the m43 cameras.

Price-wise, a new m43 body will probably be more than the D700, but shopping around on eBay you'll find some bargains. However, the lenses will be cheaper than the FX equivalent.

If you like the size and the weight of the D700/28-300mm go for it and you'll be happy. If you want something quiet, small, light-weight, go for the m43.
Logged
Larry Angier
ASMP, NAPP, ACT, and many more!

Webmaster, RANGE magazine
Editor emeritus, NorCal Quarterly

web--http://www.angier-fox.photoshelter.com facebook--larry.angier twitter--#larryangier google+LarryAngier

jeffh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4
Re: Nikon D700
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2017, 12:45:26 PM »

This topic is old, but I thought I would put in my .02 in case you haven't made a decision yet:

I bought a D700 when they first came out and shot with it exclusively until last year when my house was broken into and it was stolen. I searched for a suitable replacement and settled on a D750. The controls and build quality of the D750 are not as good as the D700, but the autofocus and DR are improved. The D810 has the build quality and controls of the D700, but in a substantially larger and heavier package. I'm still mad at Nikon for failing to produce a true upgrade for the D700. If you can get a good deal on one, I wouldn't hesitate to take it and use the money you save to get a fast Nikon lens. That's where the system really shines IMO. Look for something like their 50mm f1.4 prime (I'll bet you can find one used) and start with that. The FF body plus a small prime is not too much to carry, and you'll be amazed at the images you can capture.

That said, I just bought my first m4/3 camera because I've always wanted something smaller/lighter for heavy travel. I also hated the amount of noise that my D700 made... it was definitely not discrete in that regard. My D750 is a little quieter, but this new m4/3 is much better. I can already tell, though, that the images it produces are not as special as what comes out of my Nikons. And while the D750 is noisy, I can shoot many low-light scenes hand held and without a flash. I think my m4/3 system will be a supplement to my Nikon FF and not a replacement. Different tools for different jobs.
Logged

TonyVentourisPhotography

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 270
    • Unlocking Olympus
Re: Nikon D700
« Reply #6 on: February 01, 2017, 10:18:51 AM »

Another thought... for you, or others in a similar position... You are coming from Olympus 4/3 and film.  The format of M4/3 is going to be more familiar and to be honest... a lot closer looking to film.  I find my Olympus files much more pleasing and the grain more film like than Canon or Nikon files.  It is subjective.  Than again, I like the 4/3 format more than 3:2.  It is also closer to square.  It might be more comfortable overall. 

I also agree, if you are going for a travel zoom...go with an E-M10 or E-M5 with a travel zoom instead of the SLR.  You will get a lot more bang for the buck, much nicer extra features, equal or better image quality, and a MUCH smaller and lighter package that makes virtually no noise.  And the EVF is surprisingly handy when you get used to it... tech has come a LONG way since the D700. 

If you can get the D700 cheap...ide throw a small fast prime on it and call it a day if it is a travel and carry around camera.  I used to carry a 5DmkII with a 50 1.8 around.  It was great, and relatively compact.  Times have changed though. 
Logged
Tony
Unlockingolympus.com (ebooks & blog on getting the most from your OMD & Pen)
tonyventourisphotography.com (Commercial Photography)

razrblck

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 483
  • Chill
    • Portfolio
Re: Nikon D700
« Reply #7 on: February 01, 2017, 11:25:30 AM »

A close friend still uses a D700, I handled it plenty of times on shoots we did together. Quality wise at base ISO is as good as anything else. My D7000 gives a bit more latitude, especially in high contrast or difficult lighting situations, but the D700 is not bad at all. It has its draw backs when compared to more modern cameras, but if you get it for cheap why not? I wouldn't suggest a huge zoom on it, but that is my opinion so go with what you prefer.

In other words the D700 is still a fine camera, especially for a low price.
Logged
Instagram (updated often)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16092
Re: Nikon D700
« Reply #8 on: February 01, 2017, 04:39:21 PM »

I have a D200 as well as a D700.

The D200 is an old crop-format digital whereas the D700 is a full-frame one - same size as film was: 24mm x 36mm, and so the Nikkor lenses are perfectly matched, and the cameras (both) take all the Nikkors that I own. However, there's a caveat with the D200: I read somewhere recently that some new Nikkors won't marry with it, so best forgotton as a fresh purchase.

I wouldn't replace my D700 with anything else. Unless somebody gave me a free Leica M version, but I'd still keep the D700.

The D200 isn't much good at high ISO settings, whereas the D700 is fantastic at anything I set it to, and I love it.

The basic reality is this: if you print, how much larger than A3+ do you realistically expect to go? Both those two camers, from personal experience, are perfectly good at that size.

For Internet use, nobody has the slightest idea what's what.

If the D700 you are thinking about has been looked after well, go for it. It's a solid workhorse.

Rob


razrblck

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 483
  • Chill
    • Portfolio
Re: Nikon D700
« Reply #9 on: February 02, 2017, 10:28:06 AM »

I'll try to verify the incompatibility, Rob. By new lens I assume you mean released since 2016. I think my dealer should have something, will try to bribe. The only thing I'm sure won't work are distortion correction in camera, but if you shoot raw and autofocus works, it should be ok.

I have some usable shots from my D200 at 3200ISO. I noticed it works best with earth tones (wood, dirt, autumn forests, etc).
Logged
Instagram (updated often)

shalimarphoto

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
    • Shalimar B Photography - Family, Baby & Child Photography
Re: Nikon D700
« Reply #10 on: April 30, 2017, 04:09:59 PM »

I have an older D700 that I continue to use as a backup. It's really easy to use, takes amazing photos, and super reliable. No issues at all. You can't go wrong for the price point and how it performs.
Pages: [1]   Go Up